Bill Hamblin's idiotic Book of Mormon ''challenges''

[_Gadianton]

I remember this challenge too, Dr. Shades. Did you get in trouble for your response, by the way? I remember most critics were getting dinged by the mods on that thread because unless one tried to answer the question precisely in the loaded way Hamblin requested a response, one was deemed off topic and essentially trolling.

I have to concur with Mister Scratch. Given the vast protection Hamblin has enjoyed at FAIR, combined with his love for responding tersely to critics, he most likely is afraid to post here, where he will receive no protection and it will be a critical analysis "open season" on his ideas.

[_Runtu]

My only interaction with MIB was on one of those "challenge" threads. He challenged critics to explain the testimony of the 11 witnesses, giving just a few narrow options (they were a. telling the truth, b. lying, or c. deluded). I responded that I thought the options were too narrow and that, it really didn't matter, because even if they did tell the truth, their testimony was of little value in determining whether the Book of Mormon is a translation of an ancient record.

The response I got was a sneering dismissal, something to the tune of (I'm paraphrasing from memory) "Now I know that I shouldn't take you seriously at all." (I'm pretty sure he was a lot ruder than that.) I was kind of expecting that response, given that Dr. Peterson has always said that my take on the witness testimony suggests that I don't understand either historical evidence or witness testimony.

I still don't think the witness testimony tells us anything other than, at best, 11 people thought they saw plates, some of whom also thought they saw an angel. In the absence of any clarification from Drs. Peterson or Hamblin as to why the testimony bears on the validity of the Book of Mormon as actual ancient history, I stand by my being nonplussed by the witnesses.

[_Gadianton]

by the way, Bill Hamblin is nothing but an intellectual coward, in my opinion.

LOL. Your opinion and about $2.55 will get you an Espresso at Starbucks.

How is it that you know how much an Espresso costs? I don't even know how much one costs.

[_solomarineris]

LOL. Your opinion and about $2.55 will get you an Espresso at Starbucks.[/quote]
How is it that you know how much an Espresso costs? I don't even know how much one costs.[/quote]

xtremely funny, the way DCP sticks his feet to his mouth.
or do you think he's a closet coffee drinker?

[_cinepro]

at best, 11 people thought they saw plates, some of whom also thought they saw an angel.

I've noticed that some LDS claims need to be precisely worded to sound solid. Once you say "11 people thought they saw plates" (which is true), it really diminishes the power of their testimony.

It's like the difference between saying "My grandmother appeared to me in a dream" and "I had a dream and my grandmother was in it."

[_Daniel Peterson]

I'd love to have him here, too. DCP will try mightily to keep him away, though.

I couldn't care less if he comes here.

I just predict that he won't.

Why should he, after all? To interact with Mister Scratch? To study with Some Schmo? To learn from poor antishock8? To take lessons in composition from solomarineris? To engage in philosophical discussions with collegeterrace/PP?

LOL.

The fact is, he doesn't follow this board. He pays it no attention. (How deflating that news must be to a few here.)

Think about the many beatings we've doled out to the hapless Good Professor.

There's a commercial running on TV right now for some professional job service or other, in which little tiny reptilian monsters, imagining themselves to be Godzilla, get whacked with a newspaper by an annoyed man on a bus bench, etc.

It's hard not to think of that when Mister Scratch puffs out his chest and boasts of his illusory triumphs. I wonder if he wears a pseudomilitary uniform decked out with braids, medals, and epaulets, in the manner of Michael Jackson.

Bill Hamblin, who isn't as tough of an opponent as DCP, would be like putty in our hands, and he'd be bound to erupt in yet another embarrassing outburst, ala his disgusting RfM rampage.

That's why he stays away; he knows he would get his butt kicked.

This imitation of Walter Mitty brought to you by Mister Scratch, who disapproves of pretended mind-reading.

[_Gadianton]

Why should he, after all? To interact with Mister Scratch? To study with Some Schmo? To learn from poor antishock8? To take lessons in composition from solomarineris?

Precisely.

Let me explain. You say the above in jest, really meaning that all of us here at MDB are losers, and it isn't worth Dr. William C. Hamblin's valuable time -- he has been paid 1,000$ for a single lecture you know -- to interact with us. He has much more important things to do.

But...

We know that this same professor has spent many hours in the past interacting with people the senior apologists regard as fools, this is very clear from the materials available at SHIELDS.

And, we know further, from a link provided by Tom, that the apologists were falling all over themselves to prepare a "America's funniest anti-Mormon" franchise with the hope that the anti-Mormons, who were already a bunch of ridiculous apes, would come unglued even more and produce increasingly hilarious displays of stupidity for the apologists to laugh at.

So given what a bunch of baffoons we all are, and given the clearly stated ambitions of the FARMS elite along with Dr. Hamblin's own dealing-with-the-critics CV, one would expect Dr. Hamblin to have shown up long ago to flick us all into the dirt with his little finger and receive high-fives from other apologists and emails from people like GoodK's father saying how hilarious he is.

Given that he has never shown up to claim his easy victory, clearly, he is worried about something. I think he's worried about losing. Honestly, I've seen Hamblin's online performances, and while he can hold his own with simplistic critics, when there's even a little bit of a challenge, he resorts to the, "that's stupid" kind of replies. He wouldn't last two minutes on the same thread with Mister Scratch.

In fact, I hope I'm not out of line to do this, but I hearby publically challenge professor Hamblin to a debate with Mister Scratch on this forum on and on the Mormon-related topic of his own choosing, any topic.

*silence*

Let us raise our hands in victory!

[_Brackite]

Why would Dr. William Hamblin Post on the Recovery from Mormonism Message Board, back in the Year of 2003 when Not all Points of views on Mormonism are welcomed there? Yet, Bill Hamblin has not ever Posted on the Mormonism Discussion Message Board here where all Points of views on Mormonism are welcomed? I will also very much like to Invite Bill Hamblin to come and Post on this Message Board.

[_Daniel Peterson]

We know that this same professor has spent many hours in the past interacting with people the senior apologists regard as fools, this is very clear from the materials available at SHIELDS.

I'm pretty sure that you're capable of distinguishing between the kind of interaction that Professor Hamblin has had with James White and the kind of interaction that he would be likely to have here with Mister Scratch, let alone with Some Schmo, collegeterrace/PP, solomarineris, Mercury, TAK, Joey, and/or poor antishock8.

Given that he has never shown up to claim his easy victory, clearly, he is worried about something. I think he's worried about losing.

Mister Scratch disapproves of pretended mind-reading.

He wouldn't last two minutes on the same thread with Mister Scratch.

ROTFL!

In fact, I hope I'm not out of line to do this, but I hearby publically challenge professor Hamblin to a debate with Mister Scratch on this forum on and on the Mormon-related topic of his own choosing, any topic.

Professor Hamblin is extremely unlikely to hear of this silly "public challenge." He doesn't follow this sad little board, and I won't lift a finger to bring your frivolous challenge to his attention. I can't think of any reason he should want to get involved with an implacable, non-substantive character assassin like Scratch.

If you're serious about the challenge, contact him directly. I would suggest that you accompany your demand with some jumping up and down and a fair amount of vigorous thumping of the chest.

[_Mister Scratch]

In fact, I hope I'm not out of line to do this, but I hearby publically challenge professor Hamblin to a debate with Mister Scratch on this forum on and on the Mormon-related topic of his own choosing, any topic.

Professor Hamblin is extremely unlikely to hear of this silly "public challenge." He doesn't follow this sad little board, and I won't lift a finger to bring your frivolous challenge to his attention.

See, that's what doesn't make sense. *You* post here claiming that you are all sore over being "defamed," and whatnot. Well, here we have a thread in which Bill Hamblin's posts are called, rather directly, "idiotic." What kind of a friend are you, Dan, if you just sit there and let Hamblin get torn to pieces? Why don't you alert him to the fact that his buffoonery is on full display?

I think the reason is that you know he has a hot temper, and you know he would get crushed if he came over here. He wouldn't be able to control his emotions, and his outburst(s) would be a colossal embarrassment, and a serious blow against Mopologetic credibility. Further, I think you know that he's pretty poor when it comes to rhetoric and debate.

I remember a very key incident some time ago, in which Dr. Hamblin tried to take on Kevin Graham over on Kerry Shirts's blog (I believe that's where it was), and you had to come rushing in to bail him out. It was a sad spectacle indeed. To think: this doyen of Mopologetics was unable to hold his own! He needed his "Big Bro" DCP to come and save him.

Likewise, I think you understand that other Mopologists who have been put under the microscope--folks like L. Midgley, M. Roper, and J. Tvedtnes--would crawl away completely beaten and whimpering.

Feel free to try and prove me wrong, though. Go ahead and invite them over. It would seem that Gary Novak has already been here, using an alias. Why don't you invite the rest?